- This topic has 34 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just idly raking through the blogs on the Racing Post and came across a pretty amazing rant from Peter Thomas.
Here’s a sampler –
<i>”You only need to look on racing-related internet forums to see the kind of stuff I’m talking about.
Sitting smugly among the intelligent and articulate posts will be all manner of self-satisfied, opinionated garbage, gossip masquerading as fact, tittle-tattle put forward as news, bile spewed indiscriminately by people with nothing better to do, vile accusations sprayed around by losing punters, the pathetic noise that emanates from empty vessels.
In short, what we get are lots of lies, about crooked jockeys, bent trainers and the like, posted anonymously by those who revel in their apparent immunity from prosecution and show no regard for the reputations and sensibilities of others.”</i>
Wow. <!– s:shock: –>
<!– s:shock: –> Peter seems a pretty spiky character and is often forthright but, even by his standards, that is pretty strong stuff.
I spoke to another RP journalist recently who also left me in no doubt that his opinion of internet racing forums was somewhere on a par with his opinion on the type of chap who would slit your grandmother’s throat for a mere wheeze (although, to be fair, he was a very nice chap who was at least frank, upfront and honest about his views, which primarily centred around the anonymous nature of the posters.)
I can understand some of the points made by Peter Thomas and I can assure him that no one here at TRF takes any matter relating to possible libel, etc, lightly. We routinely remove anything we see which we have concerns over.
We’re a little less precious about merely upsetting sensibilities, I am glad to say.
We regard this site as being ‘self-published’ in as much as posts are not moderated before publication so the poster is, in our view, wholly responsible for the content they post, although we do moderate already published content as best we can. Where we post ourselves or where we publish ‘feature’ articles or third party content we would consider that as something we had responsibility for and vet it all before publication, as any newspaper or media provider would do.
I suspect Peter isn’t having a go at the forums as much as the people who post on them and we have seen enough complete fruitcakes on this site alone (and there are other more high profile sites – you know who I mean – who, unluckily for them, attract an even larger contingent of the terminally bewildered brigade) to have witnessed at first hand the type of nonsense that people can post.
But I’m very proud of the fact that this forum offers the ‘man or woman on the street’ the opportunity to have their say in public on topics/issues in racing. I think the forum community is a healthy thing to have, if managed in an appropriate way. I have a lot of respect and time for much of the work of many journalists in racing but I don’t think the racing public is necessarily served well by the printed media in certain aspects. We try to run TRF in a responsible way but we also try to ensure we don’t interfere with the offerings of our posters unless absolutely necessary.
I think that certain journalists are a bit uncomfortable or threatened in a strange way by forums. I don’t think some of them ‘get it’ at all. You would think the utopian ideal of unrestricted freedom of speech would appeal idealistically to someone choosing journalism as a career (our forum friend Zorro being a fellow who I would suspect falls at least partially into that camp) but the, admittedly limited, dealings I’ve had with some of the print media fellows has been guarded and prickly, in stark contrast to the broadcast media and racing industry people who are, more or less, very supportive (of TRF, not sure about forums in general) and have been extremely helpful, both to me personally and to the forum generally.
Perhaps, among those racing journos tied to a particular publication or other, there’s a longing to be let loose from the chains and manacles of the editors and sub-editors and policies and style manuals, a longing which manifests itself eventually in frustration.
Peter – I invite you to step over into our world and have a go. You can post here unfettered by the tinkering of the back-room. You can choose your own subjects, publish as much or as little as you want. Word counts, pah, you’ll never need to worry about them again. Even deadlines are not required. Leave them at the door with your hat and coat when you come in.
There’s nearly 10,000 members and yet another 20,000 on top of that who visit TRF each month. That total (30k unique visitors per month) is over 50% of the net average circulation of the printed version of the RP between April-May this year. We’re spiralling higher while the print media circ figures in general are diminishing. Maybe that’s where the threat is perceived, where the frustration comes in.
You never know, you might even like it here Peter! (But remember to bring that thick skin with you – we all need it around these parts).
Here’s the whole blog –
I met Peter Thomas at Salisbury’s final meeting of last year. Nice enough chap. He asked regular racegoers what we thought of the free admission day? Actually quoted me (not 100% accurate, but close enough) in the following day’s Racing Post. Anyway we had quite a chat, me, a racing pal of mine and Peter. And I asked if he got on any forums? The answer was similar to the blog and I implored him to take a look at theracingforum. To be honest, I agree with him to a certain degree, most forums are exactly how he says they are. This one however is different. Though even here there are some who seem to treat racing personalities as objects and don’t give them the same courtesy as they do fellow forumites. But it’s soon stamped out.
Value Is EverythingSitting smugly among the intelligent and articulate posts will be all manner of self-satisfied, opinionated garbage, gossip masquerading as fact, tittle-tattle put forward as news, bile spewed indiscriminately by people with nothing better to do, vile accusations sprayed around by losing punters, the pathetic noise that emanates from empty vessels
Sounds like a good working definition of the tabloid press to me.
Was thinking much the same as Tuffers but aimed at the racing hacks themselves as opposed to tabloid journos.
In amongst those who feel able to question or criticise (and there is plenty of scope) there are many sycophants of little talent on the gravy train.
I think Peter makes a very valid point and, as you know Corm, I have been equally, if not more, forthright on the very same subject in the past.
The internet and forums in particular allows for freedom of expression but with that freedom also comes responsibility.
There is still too much written online which would not see the light of day in the printed or broadcast media, not in terms of censorship per-se but in terms of legality in relation to libel, defamation and even good taste. Made all the worse due to the perceived anonymity of the internet.
It is all too easy to snipe and attack from behind an anonymous nom-de-plume, how many snipers would actually have the balls to make their allegations openly and face to face to the accused?
One aspect of the internet that does worry me is that, for some, nothing is off limits. In the "mainstream" media there are stories which get "spiked" because of, for want of a better word, decency. A story which may be of great voyeuristic interest to some but which, if published, would cause disproportionate harm to those involved or their families.
Whilst TRF is undoubtedly better than other forums and certainly much better moderated and managed, there are still examples of defamatory and unsubstantiated postings aimed at those in the racing industry or indeed at other posters who may hold a contrary view.
I am all for freedom of speech and I think the way the internet allows this is wonderful. However the good work does risk being undone by a significant minority who abuse the freedom.
Turning to the other point made by Corm, there is a strong resistance from many print journalists not only to forums but to the internet as a whole – unsurprisingly there is more resistance from the "old school" rather than the younger generation who have been raised in the computer era.
It is akin to the reaction of the newspapers when the BBC first wanted to broadcast news on the radio – they saw it as a threat and the end of printed news and it took a long time before there was an acceptance there could be a coexistence.
90% of my writing about racing is online and there are many print journalists who consider such an outlet beneath them or somehow "second class" . . . . even though most of their output ends up online and, ironically, probably have more readers in the online format.
Whilst most of my print colleagues now accept, or at least tolerate, my presence and treat me as an equal there are still one or two who will actually go out of their way to make my life difficult or even try to obstruct my work.
In time attitudes will change and the "divides" will disappear.
Sounds like a good working definition of the tabloid press to me.
Yes to a certain extent Tuffers . . . . however, although it may not seem like it, there is still "accountability" in the tabloid press, where there is statutory and regulatory redress if what is published is libellous or defamatory.
At the very least the story will go past lawyers prior to publication and the editor has ultimate responsibility for what is published, plus the journalist(s) writing the story are known and accountable.
There is no such pre-publication vetting for the overwhelming majority of matter published online.
I have occasionally published contentious articles online and in those cases I have always had a legal check carried out prior to publication. On one occasion, at least, the advice resulted in a change which probably prevented me from being sued.
Additionally if I propose publishing something critical of an individual or organisation I will invariably give them a chance to respond prior to publication. Something most newspapers and broadcast outlets will do as a matter of course and something which rarely happens online and certainly not in a forum.
All forums (or should that be fora?) are tarred with the same brush and unfortunately that means they are regarded as on a par with the worst and least-moderated forum and we all know where that forum is anyway.
On another point, I’ve seen excellent opinions posted on here and on other sites which have appeared in the print media not long after masquerading as original material with no credit given whatsoever to the source.
Sitting smugly among the intelligent and articulate posts will be all manner of self-satisfied, opinionated garbage, gossip masquerading as fact, tittle-tattle put forward as news, bile spewed indiscriminately by people with nothing better to do, vile accusations sprayed around by losing punters, the pathetic noise that emanates from empty vessels.
In short, what we get are lots of lies, about crooked jockeys, bent trainers and the like, posted anonymously by those who revel in their apparent immunity from prosecution and show no regard for the reputations and sensibilities of others
Pro hacks have a way with words, that much I’ll concede
These words from Thomas are wholly correct and little more than a succession of truisms, constructed in the stereotypical rabble-rousing come-on-rise-to-the-bait manner one would expect of a scribe employed by a down-market tabloid.
Invective-strewn over-long sentences punctuated with too many commas tend to hit between the eyes, despite what they convey being blindingly obvious to anyone with but the slightest understanding of human character in general, and in this case the character of those humans who choose to bet in particular
Cormack has swallowed the first fat juicy lugworm dangled from the Thomas barbed hook, odds-on his keepnet will be full to overflowing with TRF’s unwary inexperienced fish come sundown
Thomas doth protest too much, that much is obvious too. Freedom of speech (good bad and indifferent) on the internet and the attendant emancipation of yer man on the street annoys, threatens and frightens those whose dogma was allowed free-rein unsuppressed for far too long. From governments all the way down to journalists
Their discomfort and fear is wonderful to behold
I am a reasonably new member to this particular Forum and i have to say it is by far the most professionally run.
I personally have encountered no ‘problems or trouble’, in fact i would add that after a couple of ‘spats’ people tend to chat more.
Having been a member (sometimes too opinionated i realise now) on a previous defunct site i have also joined a ‘fallback site’ but numerous members continue their ‘controlling moderating nature’ and thus their is NO freedom of speech which is a shame as there are many good and knowledgeable characters but alas a couple of young unemployed lads are ruining that site also.
TRF however is extremely knowledgeable and i look forward to reading posts and comments on a daily basis.
If it’s anonmyous sniping you want then look no further than p4 of today’s RP.
"[The Rabble] are amateurish. I never get the impression that they are in any way savvy about public relations, image and reputations"
So says someone who doesn’t want to be named..
A cowardly and thinly-veiled sideswipe at my very good friend Paul Struthers.
If you’re gonna engage in this sort of backbiting it’s surely more honourable to do it in your own name on the interweb, so here goes…
Paul, old buddy old pal. You’re doing your CV no good by clinging on with the current bunch of losers at Rabble HQ. Paul Roy should resign and, if not, you should walk citing Roy’s refusal as your main reason.
I say this as a friend: Go while you can still salvage some dignity and some hope of a future career elsewhere. They’re dragging you down with them.
Beautiful, Drone, and from Cairo to Cartmel, your sentiments transcend far beyond Racing’s narrow horizon.
Post of the year thus far, Sir.
No doubt some journalists say / write things just to get an e-mail bag of "come-on-rise-to-the-bait" replys. But having listened to him at Salisbury last year; can assure you Peter Thomas does feel strongly about this subject. He wasn’t going to get many replys from an audience of two that day.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
Beautiful, Drone, and from Cairo to Cartmel, your sentiments transcend far beyond Racing’s narrow horizon.
Post of the year thus far, Sir.
Completely agree.
T’intternet is the best thing that’s happened to the lumpen proletariat since the Boston Tea Party, and racing forums (in their own small way) are just an extension of the new freedom of speech that allows the world’s ‘man in the street’ to find out the real sp.
Little wonder paid journo’s don’t like it.T’intternet is the best thing that’s happened to the lumpen proletariat since the Boston Tea Party, and racing forums (in their own small way) are just an extension of the new freedom of speech that allows the world’s ‘man in the street’ to find out the real sp.
Wholeheartedly agree the Internet is fantastic in terms of disseminating information – the only question I would put to you is – the way the internet operates at present, how is the "man in the street" meant to differentiate between what is fact and what is unproven salacious gossip or even malicious lies?
Freedom of speech is great but I still maintain the right comes with responsibility.
If that responsibility is abused there is a real danger the reaction could be the introduction of more draconian controls to actually restrict free speech – don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
You mean the salacious gossip and malacious lies that appear in the tabloids and glossy mags on virtually a daily basis.
You mean the salacious gossip and malacious lies that appear in the tabloids and glossy mags on virtually a daily basis.
… but the tabloids and glossy mags (which I am in no way defending) are regulated so the aggrieved party has a means of redress.
The internet is not regulated and if the person posting the lies or defamatory comments does so anonymously it is more difficult, but not impossible, to take enforcement action. But difficult enough for most aggrieved parties not to bother making the effort.
I see the point you are making David but do not think you are comparing like with like.
- Total Posts 17716
I enjoy reading the comments of fellow racing enthusiasts, but there are a lot of know-it-alls out there and as soon as you say something that they don’t agree with, they start hurling abuse at you, which is pathetic, especially as most of them wouldn’t know one end of a horse from the other.
Peter Thomas
Peter Thomas has a very valid point that forum’s should be moderated to remove things such as racism and clear slander on people’s names. However his employers are the most one-sided tabloid in the land. The paper has become a rag filled with a whole load of nothing in recent years. All the pages filled with some sort of add for bookmakers…no journalist work re-hashing numerous old stories to fill their pages…relying on press releases from stables to fill the majority of their pages and endless betting columns.
Where is the analytical constructive critizm of racing establishment. Their are in bed with Nicky Henderson so no surprise their wasn’t a any sort of piece condemning the man from one of their journalists. They keep raising their prices and the quality keep falling and falling.
James Willougby IMO is sadly missed, he brought everything to their paper. Sectional timing and a unique understanding to the game that is sadly missing these days.
I am very disappointed in Thomas and his employers…while forum’s need to be regulated on the one hand, he has a bit of cheek to pretend himself and racingpost are lap dogs to the BHA/Trainers/Jockeys etc.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.